Jeff has three suggestions for ReTweeting, and how each should be used:

The native ReTweet, or simple RT, for passing along information

The manual ReTweet, including the original link but writing your own preface (“This is a great way to ask a question, note your skepticism or add more information as you pass along the original tweet,” Sonderman writes)

The modified ReTweet, Similar to the RT, but you change the original language of the Tweet.

Sonderman then adds a fourth RT, his own concept: the neutral Tweet

But perhaps journalists could convey that sentiment by creating a “neutral retweet” for the times when they want to repost something but don’t want people to read anything into their motives.

NT @BarackObama: President Obama speaks about the American Jobs Act: http://wh.gov/live #WeCantWait

I too, am going to propose something radical.

I propose that we trust journalists to think for themselves. We are professionals, after all.

That we be held as accountable for our ReTweets as anything we publish online, in print, on Facebook and *gasp* on Twitter.

And that the beauty of social media is that we are able to see the people behind the journalist. And by creating a massive RT’ing structure we are simply pretending journalists are robots without opinions.

The bottom line is that it would be nice if we could admit that journalists are human beings, and come up with social-media policies that actually encourage and take advantage of that kind of behavior, instead of trying to stamp out any trace of humanity. Journalists would be better off, and so would readers.

Folks, we’re smart people. It’s 140 characters. Let’s spend more time on reporting the story than talking about how to RT.